When seven voters in a suburb north of Houston set out to upend an election there, they didn’t realize the powerful contingent they were upsetting.

The Woodlands voters are being prosecuted for fraud in a 2010 election for claiming residency at a hotel in the Woodlands Road Utility District. The district is supported by well-heeled developers and represented by a law firm that’s donated tens of thousands of dollars to state campaigns including that of Attorney General Greg Abbott, whose office is prosecuting the case.

Records show that Abbott has received $14,500 in campaign contributions since 2002 from the law firm Schwartz, Page, & Harding, which handles legal affairs for the Woodland Road Utility District as well as Woodlands Township and several other districts in The Woodlands.

The legal complaint to the state that led to the indictment in March of the alleged illegal voters was submitted not by local legal authorities but by James Stilwell, an attorney representing the sitting board members of the Woodland utility district.

Stilwell outlined the alleged infractions in a Sept. 10, 2010, letter to Ann McGeehan, director of the elections division of the Texas Secretary of State office.

Stilwell cc’ed the secretary of state’s general counsel and Mike Page of Schwartz, Page, & Harding. But he also cc’ed several others with no apparent connection to the case, including state Sen. Tommy Williams on the complaint, as well as state Rep. Rob Eissler and Bruce Tough, chairman of The Woodlands Township. Williams and Eissler’s districts include the utility district.

An Abbott spokesman said the case was accepted on the referral of the Secretary of State.

Stilwell did not return calls or emails.

The Williams campaign fund has received $25,500 from Schwartz, Page, & Harding since 2003. Eissler’s campaign has received $19,000 from the firm since 2002.

A lawyer representing one of the indicted voters, Kelly Case, said he will explore any involvement by Williams, “once we depose him or subpoena him to testify, as we are planning to do.” Williams did not return calls or e-mails for comment.

Case claimed that the charges were filed despite the reluctance of Montgomery District Attorney Brett Ligon.

“...Ligon refused to prosecute these cases as he did not feel that they were criminal violations,” Case said. “He continues to maintain that position. I suppose that after not being able to convince Mr. Ligon to file charges, that Stilwell sought satisfaction elsewhere.”

Brett Ligon

Ligon, though, said his office, hindered by its relatively small size, took statements and handed the case to the voter fraud division of the AG’s office, which did its own investigation. In an interview, Ligon said he grappled with the notion of “state of mind” residency that the state uses in most cases.

“The secretary of state’s office said it comes down to state of mind,” Ligon said. “That is very difficult to pursue.”

Abbott has made strong statements in the past about the need to police voter fraud and his commitment to doing so.

His office has prosecuted numerous cases of voter fraud, mostly South Texas cases of vote harvesting in the Hispanic community.

Of those, most have involved illegal possession of another’s ballot, and a number of the cases fell under the broad charge of illegal voting, which can involve anything from voting while ineligible to voter impersonation.

The Woodlands voters were indicted in March, accused of illegal voting by registering at a hotel within the boundaries of the RUD and using the hotel as their home address. The Woodlands seven were frustrated at not having a voice in the special district, which has issued $75 million in debt since its formation in 1991.

In the district’s first election, they were hoping to gain enough votes to remove the sitting board members. They relied on previous statements from state election officials that claimed the residency requirement can be determined “by the voter.” Joined by three others who were never indicted, they won the election and removed three sitting board members by a 10-2 vote. The results were later overturned by a sitting judge in Montgomery County.

The utility district board until 2010 met in an 11th floor room at 24 Waterway, a building owned by Woodlands land baron and multimillionaire developer Dirk Laukien, who was one of two voters, along with his wife, Kate, casting votes that allowed the three sitting board members of the district up for re-election to remain in light of the judge’s ruling.

The Laukiens were the only registered voters in the district prior to the failed registration of the Woodlands activists, according to an emailsix weeks before the election from Page to Adrian Heath, the leader of the rogue voters.

The 11th floor office is also the registered address for the Woodlands Development Co PAC, which has delivered $2,500 to state Sen. Williams since 2007.

Suite 1100 is also the address listed over the last several years for a number of power broker companies in the development game around The Woodlands.

The Woodlands Operating Co. was registered to the address briefly in 2009,state records show. Richard Derr, who is treasurer of the PAC, represented the operating company at district meetings for years. Derr, in fact, made suggestions on projects to the board, according tomeeting minutes.

The RUD wrote checks in 2008 and 2009 to the Woodlands Land Development Corp., which records show is managed by an operation called TWLDC Holdings GP, L.L.C. which also listed on state records in 2010 its address as24 Waterway, #1100.

Case said he believes that Abbott’s office “is trying to fit a round peg into a square hole. ... Either that or someone with a political ax to grind has made this their cause.”

While state lawmakers pushed a voter ID bill last session, at least six bills addressing mail-in voter fraud never made it out of committee. So it’s hardly a surprise that voting in Hidalgo County in South Texas is already plagued by fraud allegations.

One in five early voters in the Hidalgo city council election had someone assist them, according to a story in The Monitor, a newspaper that covers the Rio Grande Valley.

The newspaper analyzed records from a March 2010 primary and found 12.7 percent of Hidalgo County voters received assistance, primarily in the poorer areas. It found that one candidate assisted 246 people at one polling place.

Hidalgo County officials have referred a number of election-related cases to the state Attorney General’s office over the past few years, including alleged illegal voting, unlawful assistance, coercion against candidacy, and bribery.

"There seems to be, in addition to the size, an intensified cohesion and collegiality among the (Republican) AGs," Abbott told Reuters. "Part of it is based on personality. Part of it is based on sense of purpose."

On March 26 Abbott won an appeal of the EPA’s rejection of the state’s permitting process for some power plants. The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the EPA had exceeded its authority in making its ruling.

The Reuters story singles out Abbott for his role in questioning the validity today of a section of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that forces Texas and other southern states to have all changes to their voting district maps approved by the federal government.

While the Supreme Court did not directly address the issue, the court voted unanimously that the lower federal courts had overreached in redrawing district maps passed by the Texas Legislature.

Stemming mail-in fraud -- an old and entrenched practice in South Texas that is arguably the most prevalent form of voter fraud in Texas -- doesn't have the political gleam of the recently passed voter ID legislation. But given the Republican majority in both chambers, Peña is optimistic at least a few of his measures will pass.

“Democrats will not compromise in this, and I know that because I was one,” he said. Peña changed his party affiliation shortly before the legislative session, and prior to that was known as a conservative-tilting Democrat.

“They benefit from the politiquera system in South Texas. They need it to be competitive in certain districts,” Peña said, referencing the ballot harvesters known as politiqueras. “People down here are addicted to the system."

PEÑA

Peña has introduced 25 bills that touch on mail-in, absentee balloting. One, House Bill 2585, would increase penalties for illegally possessing ballots. Another, House Bill 2586, would raise the penalty for lying on a mail-in ballot application from a misdemeanor to a felony.

“These bills are aimed at enhancing penalties,” Peña said. “There is just no doubt that this activity is going on, and it needs a law to stop it.”

Peña is supported by a cadre of Republicans, and he said he expects much the same resistance from Democrats that was heard during the heated and partisan voter ID debate. A newly created House select committee, voter identification and voter fraud, is composed of three Democrats and six Republicans.

On the Senate side, Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, has introduced Senate Bill 997, which would prohibit anyone from inspecting mail-in ballot applications until after election day. Under current law, those applications are pored over by politiqueras, who visit the homes of those on the list under the auspices of assisting voters. The workers may pressure voters into casting ballots for the worker's candidates or fill out the ballot themselves to favor their candidates.

Shapiro's bill has been in committee since March 21. No hearing is scheduled. Shapiro did not return a call placed on Sunday.

During debate of the voter ID bill, Democrats reasoned that since mail-in ballot fraud was more prevalent in Texas, a policy aimed at in-person voting was misguided.

"If voter fraud is your purpose, why not a photo requirement for mail-in ballots?" state Sen, Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, asked during voter ID discussion in January. "Wouldn't you say there is more room for fraud with mail-in ballots?... Would you concede that there is more potential for mail-in ballot fraud than with someone showing up?"

It’s been eight years since House Bill 54, the last far-reaching change in the law regarding absentee ballots. The law set out penalties for appropriating ballots and otherwise abusing the mail-in voter process.

Former state Rep. Steve Wolens, a Dallas Democrat, was its architect.

Peña voted for it then, as a Democrat.

“It was great legislation that even had bipartisan support," Peña said. And referring to Rep. Joe Pickett, the sole House Democrat to support voter ID, he said, "I think our friend from El Paso, on the voter ID measure, shows that stopping voter fraud is something everyone stands behind.”

House Republicans Wednesday night passed the voter ID legislation that state GOP leaders have embraced for years after 11 hours of amendments and arguments.

The policy, which requires voters to present photo identification at the polling place before voting,will cost $2 million to implement in 2012,when it would take effect.

The measure is expected to go to a formal House vote today, then moves to a combined chamber conference committee. The bill, like all measures affecting voting rights in Texas, faces federal scrutiny. If it passes that vetting, it becomes law in January.

If it is approved, the following forms of ID would be acceptable for voting purposes:

A driver's license or personal identification card issued by the Department of Public Safety that is current or no more than 60 days past its expiration date.

A U.S. military identification card, with photo, that is current or no more than 60 days past its expiration date.

A U.S. citizenship certificate that has a photograph.

A U.S. passport that is current or no more than 60 days past its expiration date.

A concealed handgun license issued by DPS that is current or no more than 60 days past its expiration date.

Voters who lack the required ID may cast a ballot provisionally and have six days to present a valid ID to officials.

While the bill addresses a potential voter fraud issue, according to its backers, it fails to address the more concrete and documented problem of mail-in ballot fraud that plagues elections in South Texas.

State Sen. Florence Shapiro earlier this month introduced a bill that would make it more difficult for the public to determine who files an application for a mail-in ballot.

Shapiro filed the bill with a statement:

Under current law, which passed during the 78th session, an individual can assist multiple voters who cast their ballots by mail, but must sign the envelope into which the voter places their ballot, as a record of who is offering assistance. The law is designed to curb activities by unscrupulous individuals who allegedly go to nursing homes, hospitals, other assisted living centers, and areas where people with language barriers live. They purportedly visit these places to help multiple voters cast their ballots; however, sometimes these individuals commit fraud either by marking ballots contrary to the wishes of the voters they are claiming to help or directing them how to vote.

Today was the day of the Big Formality, rather than the Big Debate, on voter ID. But instead of the easy passage expected in the Texas House, the Republican-sponsored measure requiring Texas voters to show a form of ID before casting a ballot was sent back to committee to clarify some language.

Voter ID was given emergency status by Gov. Rick Perry after similar efforts failed in 2007 and 2009.

The measure being debated today would have required voters to present proof of identity – among them a driver's license, state-issued ID card, passport or military ID – before casting a ballot. If a voter could not provide the polling place with a required ID, he or she could vote provisionally, with up to six days after the election to provide an ID the county voting registrar. That provision, the six days, is what is being sent back to committee, where it is expected to be changed to six business days for clarification purposes.

Democrats, who hold 49 House seats to the Republicans’ 101, have questioned the need for voter ID when there is a larger problem of voter fraud via mail-in ballot, a practice that has been well-documented by Texas Watchdog. Proponents of voter ID have cited other problems, like the issue of deceased voters remaining on the rolls years after their death, creating the potential for fraud, as Texas Watchdog has also documented.

Twenty bills aimed at curbing endemic voter fraud in South Texas are coming from state Rep. Aaron Peña, the Hildalgo County Democrat-turned-Republican.

“And I want to file them all in a row,” said Peña, who changed parties in December, just prior to the convening of the 82nd state legislative session in January.

Peña has been outspoken on the prevalence of vote harvesting in South Texas, in which political workers are paid to go to the homes of mail-in ballot voters – those over 65 or otherwise shut in – and urge them to vote for certain candidates. Dozens of people have been prosecuted for appropriating ballots, taking them to the post office and placing stamps on them for another voter in violation of state law.

The bills currently being drafted will target that practice, Peña said.

One of his first moves as a Republican in Austin was to form the Hispanic Republican Conference, and he launched that with a promise to address voter fraud. He vowed at that time to attack voter fraud, and while he supports voter ID, he said it is not going to do much to stem voter fraud.

He told Texas Monthly in January, "If it makes us feel good to pass [voter ID], okay. … (but) It’s not the solution to the voter fraud that is out there."

PEÑA

“The Hispanic Republican Conference is going to play a large role in getting this through,” Peña told Texas Watchdog in an interview this week. “Most of us have to survive in this environment, and it is offensive to anyone who appreciates the rule of law. It is corrupting the moral fabric of the community and the political culture.”

Peña prefiled a bill in November that would require a precinct official to verify the identification of anyone assisting another voter at the polls and would limit the number of voters a person could assist to two per day. Current law does not require a helper to present ID. The bill would require an assistant to be a registered voter of the county in which the election is being held.

Texas Watchdog chronicled voter fraud in South Texas in a series of stories last year, and some state lawmakers, including state Sen. Florence Shapiro, vowed to look into it. But the focus so far this session has been on voter ID, which would not affect mail-in ballots, and Shapiro has been silent.

During a Senate committee discussion on the voter ID bill in January, state Sen. Rodney Ellis asked bill author Sen. Troy Fraser, "If voter fraud is your purpose, why not a photo requirement for mail-in ballots? Wouldn't you say there is more room for fraud with mail-in ballots?"

The bill was passed along party lines, 19-11, with Democrat Carlos Uresti absent.

The senators also approved an amendment that would kill the bill if the Legislature fails to appropriate money to cover the cost of implementation, estimated to be around $2 million. Republicans say that cost would be covered by federal funds from the Help America Vote Act.

(State Sen. Royce) ”West noted that many experts agree the greatest potential fraud is in absentee ballots, not in-person voter impersonation. 'We’ve done nothing on that,' West said. 'I hope we’ll take off our blue and red jerseys after tonight and take care of the business of Texas.'"

"Most voter fraud would be in the mail-in ballots, and the elderly are targeted because they are vulnerable. A photo ID would not have any effect on fraud in early voting.”

If the bill becomes law – and that appears inevitable as it heads for the Republican-dominated House – it will likely face legal challenges. Texas' bill was patterned after Indiana's voter ID bill, which was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008.

At a point during which the discussion evolved into the impact of Indiana's voter ID law, Fraser said the bill he wrote is solid and would withstand any challenge, “assuming it gets to the Supreme Court.”

Indiana passed a voter ID bill in 2005 that was challenged by Democrats all the way to the Supreme Court, which turned back the challenge, allowing the bill to stand.

Democrats grilled state Sen. Troy Fraser, the Republican who filed voter ID legislation two weeks ago, for hours on Tuesday regarding the associated price tag of $2 million, the trouble some voters might have obtaining a free ID card offered under the bill, permissible forms of ID and the ability of the bill, if passed, to clear constitutional and other legal challenges. Fraser often deferred the question to others.

Sen. Royce West inquired as to the definition of an election official. Fraser referred him to the Secretary of State’s office.

Sen. Carlos Uresti asked what kind of provisions would be made to help people get a free ID card, which would be distributed by the Department of Public Safety. Fraser referred Uresti to the DPS.

And when Sen. Leticia Van de Putte asked what form of ID the DPS would require in order to provide the free ID, Fraser said he did not know.

Fraser did, however, adroitly outline the parameters and requirements of his bill:

Four kinds of ID would be accepted: a Texas driver’s license or personal ID issued by the Department of Public Safety, a military ID, a passport or a citizenship certificate with a photo.

Anyone 70 or older by Jan. 1, 2012, would be grandfathered in and not subject to the new law.

Voters who have no photo ID would be allowed to vote after signing an affidavit and would have six days after the election to provide a suitable photo ID to the elections administrator.

A free ID card from the DPS would be issued to voters who state the ID is specifically to satisfy the voter ID law.

Van de Putte pointed out the bill is “more restrictive” than the bill that ultimately failed in the last session two years ago -- that bill allowed for voters without a photo ID to show two forms of nonphoto identification. But acknowledging the expanded majority of Republicans favoring voter ID this session, Van de Putte said, “There is no doubt this bill will pass.”

Opponents asked for any proof of voter impersonation, which Fraser could not cite. They explored Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, under which certain states, including Texas, must obtain approval from the U.S. Attorney General before changing voting procedures.

“These are the only two states right now with real voter ID laws,” Jennie Bowser, an election analyst at the National Conference of State Legislatures, said in an interview with Texas Watchdog. Six other states request some form of photo identification from a voter, although in those cases a simple affidavit from the voter lacking that photo will suffice.

According to data from the NCSL, there are currently 32 bills in 13 states (check various election bills here) regarding voter ID, including Missouri, Minnesota and South Carolina.

“And there is a tremendous variation regarding ID,” Bowser said. “In some states, a utility bill is considered ID, and some states have no provision for ID at all.”

Texas voters may present a utility bill to identify themselves at the polls. Citizenship papers, a birth certificate or a bank statement showing the voter's address are also accepted.

The proposed legislation will no doubt be amended as it moves through the Senate and into the House Committee on Elections. The members of House committees have not yet been finalized.